Posted by Natalie Birrell (PR Consultant),
On 1 September 2016 Withy King LLP merged with Royds LLP. The trading name for the merged firm is Royds Withy King. All content produced prior to this date will remain in the name of the firms pre-merger.
TUPE and apportioning liability
In Country Weddings v Crossman the EAT held that a Tribunal does not have the power to apportion liability between co-Respondents where orders for compensation are made towards Respondents jointly, or jointly and severally. The EAT held that all the Tribunal can do is to make an order for joint, or joint and several, liability as the case may be. If the parties have an issue as to which should bear the greater brunt of liability, this is a matter than has to be determined in the County or High Court under the provisions of the Civil Liability (Contribution) Act 1978.
The details of this case concerned a TUPE transfer where claims were brought against both transferor and transferee for a failure to inform and consult under TUPE. The Tribunal had chosen to apportion the compensation for a breach of the regulations wholly to the transferee. However the EAT held that it was quite clear that TUPE provided for the liability to be joint and several between the transferor and transferee in claims for failure to inform and consult.
This legal update is provided for general information purposes only and should not be applied to specific circumstances without prior consultation with us.
For further details on any of the issues covered in this update please contact Gemma Ospedale, Partner in Employment on 020 7583 2222.
Royds Import Case Law Update
Keeping you informed about Royds Import Case Law Update news, events and opinion.